Is the forecasted insatiable demand for pilots counted as leverage? Is the fact that many pilots with multiple CJOs are choosing other carriers leverage? As well as the fact that a much higher than average number of pilots already on property (in the bottom 10%) are resigning to go to other carriers?

Genuinely curious to hear your take on all that, if it is leverage or not.

 

Facts? Cite your data.

 

A pilot shortage can be used as leverage to an extent but at our level it isn't nearly as effective. Delta is still a top tier pilot job. Certainly we can extract some gains from company recruiting wants but the pilot shortage isn't nearly as acute at this level, if it all.

People will always choose other airlines with multiple CJOs. That's just part of the process. And what is your source that "much higher than average" are leaving? What was the average? What is it now?

 

Its only leverage if you are willing to negotiate productivity improvements. I certainly don’t want to see that happen. If we went back to 2007 work rules the company would free up close to 3000 jobs. That’s a massive loss of jobs, advancement and career earnings especially for the younger pilots. The flip side to that is our opener would have required hiring 3000 more pilots and that will never fly with the company. In the end we may shuffle work rules around a bit but the final version will come in about the same as today’s staffing. That puts us basically on par with UAL and AMR, considerably more than SWA and dramatically more than the ULC carriers. To think we can get rule changes to force staffing increases is a pipe dream. To think the pilot group would grant staffing concessions to the company is a bigger pipe dream.

 

The sources for the above are a combination of statements from LCAs and a collection of anecdotes and observations from the bottom of the seniority list, as we all as among the military community for those transitioning to the airlines. I understand it’s not scientific and please don’t dogpile on me. I thought it had been seen as a “common knowledge” problem that Delta is not as attractive as it once was and that we’re seeing that through the numbers. I understand that historically those with multiple CJOs have declined Delta, and that people switch from Delta to other carriers and vice versa in their first year. My point was that to my knowledge it has become much more of a “one way check valve” lately as people tend to switch from here rather than to here.

Again, just what I have heard from LCAs and the military communities. Since it is not robust data, I am willing to concede that it’s potentially not that big of a problem. However, does anybody have any data to the contrary?

 

One small example of leverage for the union would requiring that every SLI gets their yearly required 120 block hours. Based on a recent discussion, that doesn't appear to be happening. I'm sure there are plenty of other examples.

 

I'm not saying it isn't a problem. I'm saying that I don't know that the problem is any more worse now than it ever has been. The company has the historical data and the current data. They know the amount of people who are no-showing and leaving. You can't sit here and say "well no one wants to come here because of these anecdotes" because it doesn't do anything with leverage. You can't just manufacture leverage.

And honestly, I am not surprised Delta isn't nearly as attractive as some of the other carriers but that was a problem we were going to have to deal with in the mid-term anyways. Delta has hired more than its peers over the last decade which means there are a lot more new people here. People want to go to places with the most retirements because that makes HUGE differences over the course of your career, especially those who in the military who are being hired later in their life. My job isn't to make sure everyone wants to come to Delta. I don't really care if NO one wants to come to Delta for whatever reason.

And finally, that isn't how an argument works. You can't throw out an anecdote and say, "prove my anecdote wrong using actual data." And, to be honest, LCA are about as reliable to Betty back at 2L. Hey, remember when they were told back in their secret LCA meeting that 737Maxes were a done deal and that maybe even 787s were on the way?

 

Man, if we’re using “we are going to make you do what the contract says you must do” as leverage…we’re in a world of hurt.

 

LOL, well it appears we are there...

 

It's not 120 block, it's credit. As far as I know they are honoring it...cause they have to. There was a grievance a couple years ago about it and since then it appears to be tracked down to the second.

The complaint is that SLIs.were told they'd fly four months a year--but that ain't in the PWA and that ain't what's happening

The PWS is pretty sparse when it comes to SLis. That worked pre covid. Not so much now